Saturday, July 4, 2020

A Bygone 4th...

52 comments:

  1. Of Course The Civil War Was About Slavery.

    Watched less than 2 minutes of Donald W. Livingston's video. Not that interested in 47 minutes of history rewriting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. No, you orefer to roll in social justice tripe.

    ReplyDelete
  3. There are no too many oratories about the evils of slavery in this conversation...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Because yours is? That's a rather narrow viewpoint, Dervy?

    ReplyDelete
  5. You detect white supremacism in everything. You are literally obsessed with it. You really should cut back on watching all those Birth of a Nation movies.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You really need to run out and get some white supremacist friends. Then perhaps, you'd have someone in common you could talk about your obsessions with. Me, I find the topic extremely boring, but you kerp raising the subject. Get it through your head, not everyone is obsessed about race as you are. There are better and more important topics of discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  7. That you believe I have "a rather narrow viewpoint" due to my rejection of White Supremacy does not bother me in the least.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Obsessed with race" is how you describe someone who acknowledges reality. I find your continual denial of reality boring. As for better topics of discussion, finally relegating those with diseased thinking such as yourself to the dustbin of history is a good one, imo.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Reality is to be race obsessed? What a quaint, but overtly racist, belief.

    ReplyDelete
  10. btw - your anti-fascism is almost as delusional as your race obsessed anti-racism. Are you repressing a weak post-modern father, by any chance? As for me, I grew up in Franco's Spain going to bill fights and watching my sister dance flamenco with her castinettes clicking to to the beat of horse hooves. lol!

    ReplyDelete
  11. It is the Right that is race obsessed. Why you had such a problem with the Conservative Democrat Barack Obama. And are inclined to believe absurd fantasies about him. Also why you voted for a White Supremacist to replace him. As for the stories you tell about your life, I'm inclined not to believe them. I thought you grew up in Caracas where you were discriminated against for being White while your parents threw parties in their compound guarded by machine-gun wielding guards.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Madrid '59-62 and Caracas '66-70. My dad was USAF. My mom worked at the US Embassy in Caracas for the charges d'affaires. Her bridge partner was the US Ambassador's wife.

    ReplyDelete
  13. My chidhood was spent watching US military training films, learning how to perform covert surveillance and pick locks, as well as serve as gunner for a B-24. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  14. I shouldn't have reminded you that you previously said you lived in Caracas. You might have forgotten that lie. Not that I can say for certain you're lying, but assuming everything you say is a lie is the safe bet. As it is with Dotard.

    What I want to hear about is your childhood in Barrow Alaska and how you used to care for the sled dogs while chewing on whale blubber as the Inuit natives made fun of you and called you "Whitey".

    I'm also interested in how you grew up in Darwin Australia practicing throwing the boomerang and boxing Kangaroos while your aunt cooked you some shrimp on the barbie.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sorry, but the intervening years were all spent camping, hunting, and fishing throughout the Golden State, where my uncle's father had been a State Senator and had run for governor, as his father had before him. :)

    ReplyDelete
  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  17. So, all the trauma you suffered as a child (being discriminated against daily for your White skin) explains your prejudices and why you ultimately became a White Supremacist?

    ReplyDelete
  18. So, your time in Francoist Spain explains your love of authoritarianism and hatred for democracy? To bad Spain transitioned to Democracy, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  19. No, it comes from Joseph d'Maistre's St. Petersberg Letters, and his Pangyric to the executioner.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Wikipedia: "Maistre argued that the legitimacy of government must be based on compelling, but non-rational grounds which its subjects must not be allowed to question".

    I think "compelling but non-rational" describes Dotard well. At least his cultists find his "alternative facts" to be quite compelling. While nobody else buys it. Why your only hope for "winning" is to cheat and go for an electoral college victory.

    ReplyDelete
  21. lol! The electoral college isn't cheating. It's "constitutional". You must not be familiar with the term.

    ReplyDelete
  22. What I meant was that your side will cheat to get to the electoral college victory. Not that an electoral college victory is ITSELF cheating. btw, legalized cheating (writing the rules in your favor) is still cheating. Even if it is Constitutional.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Why haven't you changed it then? BWAH!

    ReplyDelete
  24. We're working on it. But opposition from people like you support Minority Rule is getting in the way. You have done a good job of rigging the system in your favor.

    ReplyDelete
  25. That explains why you aren't pursuing a Constitutional Amendment. It's easier to pack the Court and overturn laws that way. Right, "cheater"?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Quote: ...state legislatures have the plenary power to appoint electors in accordance with the national popular vote under the Elections Clause of Article II, Section I, which states that "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress". [end quote]

    Meaning the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is Constitutional and not "cheating". Although I could care less if you think it is. I'm fine with this kind of "cheating" to get rid of minority rule. We are a democracy. The majority should elect the president. And outside actors (Putin) certainly should have no say.

    ReplyDelete
  27. It's Unconstitutional. It violates the 9th and 10th Amendments in that it strips Individual Rights and accords them to the State. It will be challenged and it will lose.

    Headline: Supreme Court rules electoral college representatives must honor the choice of state’s voters

    Yes, the STATES voters, not the winner of the NATIONAL election.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Of course! Democracy (most votes win) is unconstitutional. btw, the case you are talking about concerned faithless electors. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact isn't in effect and hasn't been challenged in court.

    Justice Elena Kagan: Article II of the Constitution and the 12th Amendment "give states broad power over electors, and give electors themselves no rights".

    Quote: During the argument in May, several justices said they feared it could create "chaos" in November if electors were not bound by their state or its laws.

    This ruling concerned electors doing as they are instructed. They have to go with how the citizens of the state voted. OR with how state law instructs it's electors to vote (as per what I bolded).

    ReplyDelete
  29. You don't think SCOTUS was telegraphing to future cases? BWAH!

    ps- Assume the state popular vote contradicts the results of the national popular vote. Are the electors to contradict the wishes of the majority of a state's voters in favour of a national plurality? Good luck with that.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Have you ever read the 9th Amendment? The States aren't the only entities with "rights".

    ReplyDelete
  31. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    Beside THE PEOPLE, who else do you imagine the 9th amendment says have rights?

    btw, I live in TN. If Biden wins the popular vote and if I vote for Biden -- my state's electors will almost certainly vote for Dotard. Obviously I have no right to have my vote counted. It will be recorded, but it won't count for squat.

    ReplyDelete
  32. der - States? There was never a Civil war over those... @@

    ReplyDelete
  33. 10th Amendment - The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    ReplyDelete
  34. ok, so you mixed up the 9th and 10th amendments. I still don't know why you're talking about Rights while arguing the states CAN'T do something (award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia).

    ReplyDelete
  35. Neither have I. But our forefathers did. THEY had much more liberal "property rights".

    ReplyDelete
  36. My forefathers emigrated from Europe decades after slavery was abolished. They didn't own slaves either. And human beings aren't property.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Your ancestors don't go back to mitochondrial Eve, like mine do? Don't tell me, like Mermidons, they "sprang spontaneously from the earth" or like at Thebes from the teeth of the Ismenian dragon. lol!

    ReplyDelete
  38. ...the morally pure and politically righteous non-slave owning Dervish ancestral line... BWAH!

    ReplyDelete